Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,422 Year: 3,679/9,624 Month: 550/974 Week: 163/276 Day: 3/34 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are the ToE and GTT imposed upon or products of science?
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 1 of 8 (201677)
04-24-2005 8:17 AM


In the interest of keeping the "Demons and Angels" thread on topic, I thought I'd start a new thread for Faith or any other Creationists to support the following assertion:
quote:
Yes, apparently it sounds like quibbling, but the point is that these theories are NOT "conclusions" from the sciences. The sciences do NOT support evolutionism or the Geo Time Table. These two theories are IMPOSED on the sciences and the actual evidence is forced to fit into them.
Faith has made this assertion a number of times and has not responded at all when asked for anything more specific, but it is the specifics of Geology and Biology which will shed light on if this statement is true or not.
I will begin by asking questions for Faith or anyone wishing to answer, preferably a Creationist:
Do radioactive decay rates (evidence from Physics) and rock dating contradict the GTT or confirm it?
If you believe that radiometric dating is flawed, please explain how it is flawed.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminJar, posted 04-24-2005 12:24 PM nator has replied

  
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 8 (201700)
04-24-2005 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
04-24-2005 8:17 AM


It looks like this may wander over several forums, so where to put it is kinda tough. Would you rather break it into to subjects, one on GTT that could go in Dates and Dating and one on the TOE that could go in BE or keep it as is and put it in "Is it Science"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 04-24-2005 8:17 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by nator, posted 04-24-2005 1:04 PM AdminJar has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 3 of 8 (201728)
04-24-2005 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminJar
04-24-2005 12:24 PM


Yeah, I see what you mean.
I also think that these two theories are related enough to be discussed at the same time, especially since I'd like the context to be the "scientificness" of both.
Let's try to put it in the "Is it Science" forum and see what happens.
I'd be happy to close the single thread and break it up into two if it gets too cumbersome.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminJar, posted 04-24-2005 12:24 PM AdminJar has not replied

  
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 8 (201732)
04-24-2005 1:07 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 5 of 8 (202164)
04-25-2005 9:57 AM


bump for Faith or others
Gee, I was hoping to see some kind of explanation or backup for your claim, Faith.
It's quite an accusation, you know.
I have my doubts about it's truth, but I'm open to being wrong.
So, what do you have for us?

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 6 of 8 (202178)
04-25-2005 10:42 AM


I am hoping to be educated, hopefully by Faith, in how the ToE and GTT are not products of scientific investigation but are actually imposed upon Biology and Geology.
After all, I am the stupidest person at EvC, so I was hoping to learn something.

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 7 of 8 (203617)
04-29-2005 9:16 AM


Surely, somebody wants to address this? Faith?
Faith, you have repeatedly made this claim very authoritatively in various threads.
I am surprised that you have not jumped on this.
I know you are involved elsewhere, but if you could just let me know if you plan on elaborating upon your claims, it would be great. Thank you.

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by nator, posted 05-01-2005 11:11 AM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2191 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 8 of 8 (204089)
05-01-2005 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by nator
04-29-2005 9:16 AM


Re: Surely, somebody wants to address this? Faith?
bump

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by nator, posted 04-29-2005 9:16 AM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024